CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY
4.1 PROXIMITY AND DISTANCE BETWEEN RESEARCHER AND RESEARCHED
The ethnographic method can yield qualitative data rich in nuance and detail about the
respondents, their way of life and how they understand their protest action (Robben and Sluka, 2007). To decipher meaning requires the researcher to be close to, familiar with and even intimate with the people, organisations and movements involved in protests. Participant observation, in-depth interviews and life stories (biographies) are some of the ethnographic techniques that are relied upon by researchers with such objectives (ibid). Proximity to the subject matter is key in such studies.
Barker and Cox (2000, p. 3) have a problem with studies of social movements that lack intimacy or proximity with their subject matter. They are concerned that there exist "a certain 'distance' between much social movement theory and actual social movement practice." They refer to McAdam (1996, p. 339) who points out that:
Reflecting the influence of ... broad structural theories, most recent empirical work has tended to focus on the role of system-level factors in either facilitating or constraining movement activity. Consequently, we know comparatively little about the lived experience of activism and the everyday strategic concerns of movement groups.
As a corrective this study attempts to penetrate the "lived experience of activism" through the use of an ethnographic actor-oriented approach that is designed to reveal the "everyday strategic concerns" of grassroots leaders of the South African protest movement. As part of this endeavour, and given the researcher's involvement with social movements as an activist in the past, the study secondarily employs the autobiographical method in order to shed
additional light on the subject.
The rapport between researcher and the respondents, especially after they learned that I was an activist like them, was useful but raises the methodological and ethical question of how much distance or commonality of interest should be allowed between the researcher and the researched. One view is that distance is necessary between the two parties because "our research needs to be value-free, and that as researchers we need to be neutral observers of the social world" (Ali, et al. 2004, quoted in Sinwell, 2009a, p. 34). Ethnographers have disputed this view of social science suggesting that the researcher needs to be as close as possible to the respondents in order to really understand the social processes shaping their behaviour
(Wolcott, 1999).
It is generally accepted these days that social research is a social activity and as such enters the field with certain interests, pre-occupations and prejudices. Total detachment from one's subject matter is regarded as a practical impossibility. There is also skepticism about the use and efficacy of procedures that supposedly increase the possibility of detachment. At the same time suspicion still exists about researchers who over-identify with their subjects, who "go native" in such a way that their findings might be seen as shaped more by their sympathies rather than by scholarly commitments. To solve this problem Sinwell (2009a, p. 34) suggests that it is possible that "one can be involved with the movements they are studying but at a certain distance," and this is possible, according to Lichtenburg (2002 p. 127), if "we are willing to keep an analytic lens focused on the groups we study," because, "closeness and analytic distance are not mutually exclusive" (ibid). In his study of South African social movements Sinwell (2009a, p. 28) characterises himself as an "activist-researcher".
4.2 INTERVIEWS
The primary technique used to collect data in this study was the in-depth interview because it allows for the exploration of taken for granted knowledge that normally is "not readily
articulated" and where people involved in the same activity are likely to have "multiple
perspectives" (Johnson, 2002, p. 105). The interviews were conducted with activists involved in organising protests at grassroots level in their communities. Altogether 15 activists were interviewed, 10 were interviewed twice, between August 2009 and May 2010, in two- to three- hour interview sessions. The interviews may as well be described as conversations because of the informal and intimate tone I tried to cultivate. They were conducted at the activists' homes where I thought they were more likely to feel relaxed and in control. A set of prepared
questions based on the research objectives was used flexibly to guide the interview process (Please see Appendix 1). A small electronic recorder was used to tape the interviews.
Transcripts of the interviews were used during analysis.
The interviews went well attaining the objectives of the research project. The respondents seemed relaxed and were willing to share their ideas and experiences with the researcher. In my assessment there developed goodwill, rapport and a spirit of "comradeship" between me and the respondents within the constraints of the researcher-researched relationship.
On some occasions joint interviews were conducted. This happened more or less
spontaneously but proved useful in that I could observe the respondents interacting and, for example, points of agreement and disagreement sometimes arose in the course of their conversation which added further light on the subject matter.
Many more hours were spent with respondents over and above the couple of hours of an interview session. Breaks during and in between interviews provided an opportunity for the researcher and the respondents to go for a walk, drive, eat or just sit around talking. This contributed to building rapport and kept the atmosphere natural and relaxed and provided additional space for reflection on the issues under discussion. In some cases respondents took me on informal and often informative tours of their area.
The main consideration in selecting the research sites was to target those areas that
experienced protests during the service delivery protest phase that began from about 2004.
Harrismith was chosen because it was the first in the Free State wave of protests; Khutsong because it was the biggest and most significant of the struggles around demarcation and no less because of its victory; Balfour was selected because in 2009 it was perhaps one of the most prominent of the recent protests and the only area that was visited twice by the country's president as a result of protest action. Soweto represents new social movement mobilisation that occurred during an earlier period and thus served a comparative purpose; I also chose it because of my intimate familiarity with the area and the struggles and organisations studied here, namely, the LPM and SECC.
The method of selecting respondents can be described as random but purposeful. Grassroots leaders were sought, but who exactly ended up being interviewed depended on a number of factors some of which were outside my control. Some were introduced to me through contacts I knew beforehand, others not. My aim was to interview grassroots leaders of the community protests but not necessarily the committee member or office bearer. In the end it was mostly committee members who got interviewed as it is such people that were considered "grassroots leaders" by those who facilitated contact. In some instances, without prior contacts, I simply drove to the area and convinced people to take me to a local protest leader, and they did.
In Soweto I had more control over who got interviewed and I selected the most active female leaders in their respective organisations. They had to be women because in all the other areas the respondents were men creating a problem of gender bias in the sample. I also knew them beforehand. The fact that the vast majority of the respondents are male is a problem for the research and I tried to compensate for this by consulting related research studies with a gendered perspective to inform my analysis (namely: Jolaosho, 2010; Runciman, 2010;
Tissington, 2010).
The aim of the interviews was to find out how the respondents had personally got involved in the protests, their political history, their experiences organising protests, their views on the
protests, their motivations and their visions of the future. I wanted to understand the protests from their point of view and to try and penetrate beneath what we read in the newspapers and in academic accounts of protest action. I was hoping for a balanced and holistic understanding of what makes people protest and also to give space for the respondents to reflect on their own experiences in some detail. It soon became clear to me that many people and communities faced similar conditions of poor service delivery and the question was why some organised protests and others did not. It was also interesting to find out about the history of a person before and after their involvement in protest activism.
Barker and Cox (2002) argue that "activist theorising" involves movement activists developing theories, rationales and explanatory frameworks to make sense of their activism. It is this general frame of reference or store of knowledge that an individual activist will use when he or she strategises, makes tactical decisions, inspires people in a speech or mobilises others to partake in protest action or related collective activities. This knowledge is constantly changing because it is "knowledge-in-struggle" (ibid). In this study I call it the "theoretical vision" in the same spirit that other researchers have emphasized the importance of "ideas and idea-makers in social movements" (Schurman and Munro, 2006, p. 1). I imagined it would be possible to elicit this knowledge in a conversation with an activist especially one who plays a leading role albeit at grassroots level. My assumption was that participation in the local organisation of protests requires leadership activities that will involve aspects of what Barker and Cox (2002) call activist theorising. It is these theories or ideas that I wanted to elicit from my respondents and to relate them to the political and social circumstances that informs political action and which such action in turn seeks to shape.
The method of conducting two interviews interspersed by several months' time gap introduced an aspect of movement to the interview data as it captured changes in the situation and in the thinking of the respondents over time. It suggested the existence of stable and transient attitudes and opinions held by the respondents. The interviews conducted during the second round seemed slightly more comfortable, interesting and illuminating than the first ones.
During the 5 month gap between the first and second interviews I began preliminary analysis of
the interview data and, as a result, the second set of interviews seemed more focused and efficient. Respondents were more relaxed because they were by now acquainted with the research project and had thought a bit over some of the issues. This was evident in the clarity of their responses among other things. The interviews were less laborious because I did not ask new questions but rather went over the same ground delving into a few areas of emphasis. The respondents were eager to talk and their answers seemed fluent, well thought out and had more depth.
Some respondents' thinking developed noticeably between the first and second interviews, and this was especially the case with the youth. In some areas there had occurred some
developments in the situation, for example, in Balfour there had in the meantime occurred another protest. Historical and intellectual developments impressed upon me the fact that some research designs tend to take a still picture of a moving social process. In some instances it felt as if a lot had changed in a mere 5 months although there was also an overbearing sense of continuity especially in relation to the failure of the authorities to address the problems raised by the protesting communities. The palpable development in some respondents' thinking has great relevance for this study's theoretical framework which postulates a process of "cognitive" development {Eyerman and Jamison, 1991} or "conscientisation" {Freire, 1972} as a result of people's involvement in protest action.
In order to protect the respondents in terms of the confidentiality of their responses I have used pseudonyms rather than their real names in my report.